|
To understand why, let us recall how we reached this
juncture in history. How is it that Iraq today has a
democratically elected head of state, government and
Parliament? How it is that members of the most
repressed ethnic groups now hold the highest offices
of state? All these welcome developments are a
result of the courage and vision of President Bush
and his allies, British Prime Minister Tony Blair
and Australian Prime Minister John Howard, leaders
whose commitment of troops to enforce U.N. Security
Council resolutions liberated Iraq.
Without foreign intervention, the transition in Iraq
would have been from Saddam's bloodstained hands to
his psychopathic offspring. Instead, thanks to
American leadership, Iraqis have been given an
opportunity of peaceful, participatory politics.
Contrary to the new conventional wisdom, Iraq and
the history of 20th-century Europe demonstrate that
force of arms can implant democracy in the most arid
soil.
The rapidity of the democratization and reform of
Iraq is staggering. There was no German state for
four years after the Second World War. By contrast,
Iraq has moved from a centralized, one-man
dictatorship to a decentralized, federal republic in
half that time.
Inevitably, there have been stresses and strains. In
Iraq these have been amplified by the terrorism of
the remnants of the fascist Baathist dictatorship
and our interfering neighbors. To contain these
tensions, and to defend our young democracy,
requires the support of American and other troops.
Foreign forces are needed to train and equip the new
Iraqi armed forces and to give Iraq its own
counterterrorism capability. Only the United States
and its closest allies are able to provide such
assistance.
Creating these Iraqi forces has not been easy, but
Iraqis have been undaunted by the difficulties.
Every terrorist attack on Iraqi forces leads to a
surge in military recruitment--the opposite of the
appeasers' myth that resisting terrorism causes more
terrorism. For all the short-term problems, the
soundness of the long-term strategy of building up
Iraqi forces was demonstrated in recent days when
Iraqis took over sole control of security in the
holy city of Najaf.
As Iraqi forces gain in confidence and capability,
so the need for foreign troops will diminish. The
number of foreign troops will be determined in
consultations between the Iraqi government and its
foreign allies on the basis of operational
requirements.
American forces are in Iraq at the invitation of the
democratically elected government of Iraq, and with
the backing of a United Nations Security Council
resolution. Your soldiers are in my country because
of your commitment to democracy. Moreover, during my
visit to Washington, Mr. Bush reaffirmed the United
States' complete support for the Iraqi political
process toward sustainable democracy, and for the
fight to defeat fascist and jihadist terrorism in
Iraq.
That commitment to liberty has shaped our opposition
to any timetable for withdrawal. There are also two
practical, policy reasons to avoid such a scheduled
reduction in foreign troop numbers. First, a
timetable will aid the terrorists and tell them that
all they have to do is wait. Second, military plans
must be flexible. We should have the suppleness to
respond to the often-changing level of terrorist
threat. Indeed, we will require ongoing security
assistance in many forms for many years to come.
If we keep progressing at the present rate, Iraqis
may be able to take over many security functions
from foreign forces by the end of 2006. That is not
a deadline, but it is reasonable aspiration. During
my visit to the United States, I was fortunate to
meet relatives of some of the brave troops serving
in Iraq. They were staunch, and I want their loved
ones to have to serve in Iraq not a moment longer
than is necessary.
Americans should be proud of what its soldiers have
achieved. The presence of foreign forces has
prevented a renewed civil war in Iraq--renewed
because there has already been a civil war in Iraq.
For 35 years, Saddam and his Baath Party made war on
the Iraqi people. The liberation of Iraq ended that
civil war.
Above all, American forces provide Iraq with a
much-needed deterrence capability. In the past, Iraq
sought an illusory security through the follies of
aggression, terrorism and weapons of mass
destruction. Today, our external security comes from
our alliance with the United States. Our neighbors
can thereby be assured that we will settle all of
our differences with them peacefully.
Sadly, some of our neighbors have chosen not to
understand this. They seem either unwilling or
unable to shut off the pipeline of terrorists
crossing into Iraq. And in addition to what is at
least passive support for the terrorists, some of
them are providing financial and material support to
them, too. They must desist from this behavior now.
While the problem of some of our neighbors
supporting terrorism is bad enough, we can only
imagine what our neighbors might have done if
American troops had not been present. Most likely,
Iraq would have been transformed into a regional
battlefield with disastrous consequences for Middle
Eastern and global security.
Without American forces, the vision of American
leadership and the quiet fortitude of the American
people, Iraqis would be almost alone in the world.
With its allies, the United States has provided
Iraqis with an unprecedented opportunity. Iraqis
have responded by enthusiastically embracing
democracy and volunteering to fight for their
country. By giving us the tools, your troops help us
to defend Iraqi democracy and to finish the job of
uprooting Baathist fascism.
Mr. Talabani is president of Iraq.
www.opinionjournal.com
Top |
® 
